Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission December 17, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda <br /> <br />None. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />5. Special Planning Case SP-120-03 <br /> <br />Planner Prososki indicated that Staff proposes an administrative variance process for setbacks <br />that are limited to within 25% of Code requirements and noted that the Community Development <br />Director would be the one to approve the variance. The process would be that Staff approves, <br />notifies the adjoining property owners and the Planning Commission reviews it before final <br />approval is granted. <br /> <br />Planner Prososki indicated the applicant would have the option of going through the formal <br />variance process if they do not agree with the Staff recommendation. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked if the administrative variance approval has been discussed with Council. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had provided a brief report to Council <br />on the proposal and told them it would be coming to them for consideration. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson commented that he would prefer the fee be $75.00 rather than the <br />proposed $50.00. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson agreed with the $75.00. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller commented that if the applicant wants to go through with the formal <br />variance process then they would have to pay another $150.00. <br /> <br />Director Ericson suggested considering lowering the formal fee if they have gone through the <br />administrative process and paid the $75.00. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson indicated he would go along with the $75.00 for the administrative variance fee <br />and $100.00 for the formal fee. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked how Commissioners felt with the 25% proposed by Staff. He then said <br />he is fine with the proposal. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller indicated that she feels the reasoning makes sense. <br /> <br />The Commission asked that Staff include language indicating that no variance of less than 5 feet <br />to the sideyard would be approved. <br /> <br />Planner Prososki asked whether the Commission was comfortable with the approval process as <br />outlined by Staff.